I've been very excited by the prospect of this lens as an all purpose travel and 'carry anywhere' lens. My old (now long gone) 24-120 performed sterling service in this duty on an F100, and I was hoping that this would be a big improvement. Recently I've been using the nikkor 24-85 f2.5 lens, and although it works well enough, it doesn't quite have the range I wanted.

So, here are some simple notes about the lens, and some basic conclusions in terms of its usage, and it's image quality.

This was a pleasant surprise, the lens feels well made, and, although plastic, the body itself feels very solid, my only gripe is that the front element is slightly loose.

First of all the bad news . . the zoom ring is in front of the focus ring. This was also the case with the 24-85 AFS, but it doesn't make it less irritating. I imagine one gets used to it, but combined with the ability to manual focus simply by turning the ring (without changing the setting), I'm finding it tricky.

The good news is that the lens feels well balanced, the zoom ring is smooth and the ability to simply grab the focus ring is excellent (when you want it!).

As we've come to expect with Nikon's AFS lenses, the focusing is very fast and very precise - I haven't managed to make the lens hunt on my D1X except in unreasonably low light, and it still does a good job then. Focusing is not as fast as my 17-35, but I imagine this is a function of the longer focal length. I don't have the 70-200 AFS, which seems to be the benchmark.

No Fancy controls here (unlike the 70-200) just a simple on and off button. But it works extremely well, I've taken pictures at 120mm right down to 1/5th second, and although one wouldn't expect it to come off every time, it seems pretty reliable

I have no quibbles about the central definition, and I'm afraid I haven't had time to test the lens at a number of different apertures, but there is no doubt that the edge definition is slightly inferior to the 24-85 at most focal lengths (especially the wide end). It would have been unreasonable to expect it to be otherwise - a 5 times zoom is a tall order, and this is relatively inexpensive as well.

Images have good contrast and colour - not easily bettered by the wonderful 17-35 AFS.

I found a little CA in the corners of the shots at the extremes of the range, but nothing drastic.

Testing the lens on a tripod with the VR turned off is rather unfair, as this can be used to ensure that one uses the lenses sweetest aperture.

I would like to have had the tamron 24-135 and the nikon 28-105 lenses to test against, but unfortunately I haven't! I used the tamron for a short time, and my impression is that this is quite a lot better in terms of image quality.

Clearly not a 'professional' lens as such, it produces good quality images in a lightweight and very convenient package. The addition of VR and AFS really add value to this lens.

In my opinion VR is very much more important than simply allowing photography in low light, it allows real control over the aperture in all lighting conditions.

It's early days to make a complete decision, but, if you need a small and convenient lens for travel, or so as to be able to keep your camera with you at all times, this lens is an attractive option at a very reasonable price.

Finally, the sun has come out and I've been able to take some 'real' photographs: Using the lens handheld on a longish walk has certainly changed my feelings for the better.

Here are some shots from my first 'walkabout'

If you've got this far - thank you. I can't imagine why I've spend all this time fiddling about, but if it's been useful to you, then I guess it wasn't a complete waste of time.

Kind Regards

Jono Slack